combatarmsfandomcom-20200222-history
Forum:Vote:Chatroom Etiquette
Verdict Approved. ''' ZeroExalted(Talk) • 14:54, November 1, 2013 (UTC) The Vote in Question This '''vote aimed to decide whether or not the rules of the Wiki affect the Chat, in terms of of Profanity, Harassment, Spam, any other form of rule-breaking, and wherever applicable. Regarding the Vote To be honest, this vote isn't really necessary. The rules should automatically apply to Chat, for many reasons. Keep a few things in mind: *Not everything has to go to a vote. *As seen here, the rules of the Wiki apply to WikiChat when applicable ''(such as our policies on Spam/Harassment/Profanity because it is---and nothing more---a feature of the main site. *Common courtesy should extend outside across the site. However mature you think someone has to be to play CA is irrelevant. That's ''Nexon's'' problem. Here, our rules apply, regardless of our audience's varying ages. If we decide on keeping profanity to a minumum, then our word is law. *The administrators decide the rules. The Community can contest whatever they want, and we will listen to them. We may act accordingly. But they cannot interfere with the rules we set. *As such, Central Wikia can do nothing to interfere with petty matters such as these within our Community. We have free will and free rein within our site's boundaries, and they always expect us to work out our problems ourselves. Regarding the Staff This is unrelated to the vote, but something that I will address anyway. The real problem here is that the administrators of our site are too lax. Not only are they lacking in numbers, but they don't carry the authority that they have on other sites---because they've mingled too much with the rest of our Community. This, therefore, gives some users the audacity to walk all over the administrators, and all the other rules across the site. Especially since they (mistakenly) feel confident that the administrators won't---or can't---do anything about it. This doesn't happen on other Wikis. At the very least, it should never have to. At this point, we have people starting propositions for everything, wanting to pass personal interests through and clamoring how they're not being properly represented, their voices aren't being heard, or they have the right to. '''Wrong. While obviously the users of the community are to be respected, and their opinions treasured, not everything has to be decided by them. That's why we have administrators in the first place, to take care of things that the ordinary user cannot. Appointing new Moderators or Administrators isn't something to be voted on by the Community. It can be, and the elevation of an ordinary user to a staff member through a vote can be perfectly valid. But this rarely happens in most situations. Adminstrators, and administrators alone should appoint new staff members. It's up to them, as their 'problem, to find new mods & admins on the basis of their quality, character, and active dedication. They decide on it together, as a group. The Community gives their opinion afterwards, and ''then steps are taken if the decision wasn't the right one. Quality alone won't cut it. You can have a handful of quality edits, but a lack of activity and overall terrible conduct dim your prospects by quite a bit. Nor quantity. Having thousands of edits---or these days, simply comments or user page edits---don't indicate anything about you except that you have a lot of spare time on your hands, and you're most likely not cut out for a staff position. Those who hope to get through by quantity alone often find themselves lacking in quality; maybe through grammar and illiteracy, conduct, or positive contributions. And activeness. How can we measure how good of a staff member you'll be if you're hardly on enough? How can we count on you when important issues arise? And yet, you could be on ''all ''the time and not contribute at '''all. And many other things are taken into consideration. When all else fails, and when there's no one else to convene and decide, you end up with how I became an administrator. A desperate passing of the torch, to someone you think may or may nor carry on the legacy you've created. But we're not going to let that happen. The Wiki isn't going anywhere anytime soon, and neither are its rules. ---- Right now, we have too many moderators---chat or otherwise---and not enough moderating. People who sit in chat all day, yet refrain from making a single, actual edit for days, if not weeks at a time. Furtermore, we don't have clear-cut rules. While we do have a guideline to adhere to, hardly anyone follows it. General policies and rules are vague, some things are just completely ignored, and some people think that they can make up their own rules. This is just a heads-up. The issue of administration will be better addressed at a later point. Closing The voting question once again, as mentioned above, is '''''whether or not the rules of the Wiki affect the Chat, in terms of of Profanity, Harassment, Spam, any other form of rule-breaking, and wherever applicable. Notes Leave your vote by using the or templates in a single comment. Like any other voting measure, you only get one vote (and therefore, comment) and must explain the reasoning behind it. No unnecessary comments. What that means is that there will be no discussion here, no additional comments, of any topic. You can move it elsewhere. You may not delete your comments or change your votes once you've cast them. Suspicious activity will result in swift punishment.